We are convinced that many people do not
realize how widespread false teaching is in our day. They simply “go to church”
or accept “church membership” and fail to have spiritual discernment regarding
what is taught by the pastor, preacher, or priest. They just assume that all is
well; otherwise, the denominational headquarters surely would not employ a
particular person to represent their doctrine publicly. This is a woefully
dangerous attitude to have, one that will lead us astray and into error. Some
of this error may be exceedingly perilous and will lead both the teacher and
the hearer to eternal condemnation!
Jesus warned about the Pharisees of His day:
“Every plant which My heavenly Father did not plant shall be uprooted. Let them
alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if a blind man guides a blind
man, both will fall into a pit” (Matthew 15:13-14). Both the “blind” teacher as
well as the “blind” hearer or student will fall into the spiritual “pit” and
face the present and eternal consequences of false teaching.
Many of our readers will recognize the name of
William Barclay, the voluminous writer of Britain in the past generation. This
teacher and writer was quite engaging and many have found his writings to be interesting
and illustrative of Biblical teachings. He wrote small commentaries on the
entire New Testament and many other books, a total of more than seventy!
But not all of his writings are safe! Some of
his teachings are subtle, false and dangerous! Harold Lindsell plainly says, “I
do not think William Barclay was a Christian. . . I cannot believe he was a
Christian in the New Testament sense of the term.”[1] What would make him write
such a statement? What did Barclay really believe and what did he disbelieve?
Let’s consider several points.[2]
1. Barclay denied the
virgin birth of Christ
Barclay admitted this unbelief in his own
words: “I do not think that we are intended to take the Virgin Birth literally
. . . I think we are clearly intended to take the story of the Virgin Birth as
a parabolic, symbolic, pictorial, metaphorical method of carrying the unique
relationship with God back to the very birth of Jesus.”[3] However, Scripture
is quite clear about Jesus’ unique, miraculous birth, apart from any earthly
father. Matthew explains: “. . . when His mother Mary had been betrothed to
Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy
Spirit” (1:18). The angel Gabriel said to Joseph, “. . . the Child who has been
conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit” (v. 20). See also Luke 1:26-38 for even
further elaboration of this theme.
2. Barclay was a
universalist
Barclay was convinced that all would eventually
be with God in heaven. He wrote, “I am a convinced universalist. I believe that
in the end all men will be gathered into the love of God . . . It is impossible
to set limits to the grace of God . . . I believe in the ultimate and complete
triumph of God . . . You can go to heaven via hell.”[4] This flatly contradicts
the words of our Lord who declared that the sinners on His left would hear His
awesome words, “Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has
been prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41). He went on to
state quite plainly: “These will go away into eternal punishment, but the
righteous into eternal life” (v. 46). See also 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 and
Revelation 20:11-15; 21:8.
3. Barclay was an
evolutionist
We know that the Word of God plainly tells us,
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). We
further read that God used Christ Jesus to create everything, visible and
invisible (Colossians 1:16-17). This would include the first two human
beings—Adam and Eve. Jesus taught the historicity of these first two people in
the Garden of Eden (Matthew 19:4-6) and Paul did likewise (Romans 5:14; 1
Corinthians 15:22, 47; 2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:15). Evolution is
plainly a lie and must be rejected as a false doctrine—regardless of how
popular it is in our day.
Barclay, however, was an evolutionist: “All
life, including man, came from pre-existing life . . . within the universe
itself we see a process of evolution in which man has come to be what he is
after millions and millions of years of development. The long climb from the
amoeba to the man—may we not see design and purpose there?”[5] Regardless of
its popularity, evolution is a lie that must be rejected and will surely
condemn those who hold to it.
4. Barclay had a
defective view of prayer
Scripture says that we may pray for all things
within God’s will, but Barclay disagrees: “I do not think that it is right to
pray for things . . . I cannot think that it is right to pray for a new house
or a new car or a new typewriter or even a new job.”[6] Jesus, however, taught
that it was good to pray for material things, such as food: “Give us this day
our daily bread” (Matthew 6:11). We may pray for anything that is within God’s
will. So once again, Barclay deviates from the instructions on Scripture. While
God is interested in the “big” things of life—salvation and the gospel—He also
is interested in our daily needs and concerns.
5. Barclay had a
defective view of the death of Christ
To Barclay, Christ’s death merely demonstrated
God’s love for mankind. He wrote, “It seemed to oppose God and Jesus, and to
present me with a God who was out to punish me and a Jesus who was out to save
me.”[7] It is true that God demonstrated His love in the death of Christ
(Romans 5:8), but it is also true that His death is presented in terms of
propitiation, redemption, and reconciliation. “In this is love, not that we
loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our
sins” (1 John 4:10; cf. Romans 3:24-26; 5:6-11).
6. Barclay had a
defective view of the person and nature of Christ
We know that Scripture shows Jesus to be “God”
in nature (John 1:1), and John the apostle confessed Him, “My Lord and my God”
(20:28). But Barclay believed in a form of Adoptionism. He wrote, “Jesus Christ
as a human being who had been taken up into divinity . . . Jesus was a man into
whom God came.”[8] Adoptionism can be traced back to the second century when it
was condemned—and it should be condemned in our day as well. Jesus was and is
both God and man, both deity and humanity (cf. Romans 1:2-4).
7. Barclay was
unscripturally tolerant of the belief and unbelief of others
We do know that tolerance is a quality in the
Christ’s life. Paul says that we are to have an attitude that shows “tolerance
for one another in love” (Ephesians 4:2). But we are not to tolerate false
teachers and false teaching. We are to “turn away” from false teachers (Romans
16:17-18) and are to recognize those who reject the Biblical Christ as “false
prophets” who have the spirit of “antichrist” (1 John 4:1-6). We must denounce
and withdraw fellowship from those who present false teachings and unscriptural
ways (Acts 20:28-31; 2 John 7-11).
Barclay, however, tolerated those who must not
be tolerated. He explains, “I am a very
tolerant person, and the older I get the more tolerant I become. . . I am not
likely to condemn a man’s beliefs. If through them he has found his way to God,
then that is his affair. I shall only think him wrong, if he refuses to extend
to me the same sympathy that I extend to him. The one attitude that I believe
to be wrong is the attitude of the man who believes that he has a monopoly of
the truth and that there is no way to God but his way.”[9] Barclay’s tolerance
of everything but intolerance is far from the perspective of Christ and His
apostles. Peter says that there is salvation only in Christ (Acts 4:12) and
Jesus Himself declared, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one
comes to the Father but through Me” (John 14:6).
8. Barclay questions
plain statements of Scripture
We must never question the plain teaching of
Scripture. The Bible is God’s inspired and authoritative Word (2 Timothy
3:15-17) and to question the Bible is to question God (cf. John 12:48). To
reject God’s Word is to reject God. Whether we speak of creation or the flood
of Noah, the virgin birth and sinlessness of Christ, the deity of Christ and
the personality of the Holy Spirit, the atoning death of Christ and His
resurrection, we must accept what is plainly revealed in God’s Word.
What about Barclay? Consider the Biblical
teaching on demons (cf. 1 Timothy 4:1-2). And what about Barclay? He wrote
concerning demons: “It may seem fantastic to us; but the ancient peoples
believed implicitly in demons. . . Even if there are no such things as demons.
. . .”[10] The fact that Christ Himself accepted demons as actual malevolent
spirits is cast aside by Barclay.
9. Barclay questioned
the miracles of Jesus
If Jesus was and is the Son of God, then
miracles are not only possible but they actually happened. Jesus said, “If I do
not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do them, though you
do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that
the Father is in Me, and I in the Father” (John 10:37-38). The Lord also said,
“The very works that I do—testify about Me, that the Father has sent Me”
(5:36). Peter on Pentecost declared that Jesus was “a man attested to you by
God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him” (Acts
2:22). Without doubt, Jesus performed miracles and these testified to His
identity and power.
However, Barclay doubted the miracles of Jesus.
Concerning the feeding of the five thousand, Barclay says, “It does not matter
how we understand this miracle.” He lists several possibilities to it, including
the “perfectly natural” explanation of selfish people sharing their food with
one another: “All began to share, and before they knew what was happening,
there was enough and more than enough for all.”[11]
10. Barclay was a
member of the Church of Scotland all of his life
We can learn something about a person by noting
what he is, religiously. And this includes the matter of church membership and
denominational devotion. In his earlier years, Barclay was a “parish minister”
for this denomination of Presbyterian tradition. This, of course, is a
full-fledged denomination, unscriptural in various practices and unlike the
early community of Christ. For instance, while Barclay believed that Paul
taught that “baptism was adult baptism and baptism was instructed baptism and
baptism was, if possible, baptism by immersion,”[12] he held membership in a church that continues
to practice infant, uninstructed sprinkling.[13]
11. Barclay was a
religious liberal
A “liberal” in theological terminology is one
who denies many Biblical teachings and miracles. “Liberal Protestantism is a
modern movement that reinterprets the biblical and historical doctrines and
practices of Christianity. Reluctant to endorse orthodox doctrines such as the
virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the need for renewal by the
Holy Spirit and the infallibility of the Bible, liberal Protestants are more
interested in adapting religious ideas to modern culture and thought.”[14]
With this background, Barclay wrote, “I
suppose, if you wished to label me, you would call me a liberal.”[15] He
explains that as a liberal, belief in Scripture is unimportant in establishing
unity between people: “Why is it that we must make so much of our differences
and so little of our agreements? . . . One man condemns to outer darkness
anyone who says that Moses did not write the Pentateuch, that the story of
Jonah is not literally true, that maybe John the apostle was not the pen-man of
the Fourth Gospel. Another has arrogant contempt for what he regards as academic
ignorance. If only we were a little more sympathetic to each other, if only we
would stop labeling each other heretic and outcast, truth would be better
served, and the day be nearer when there will be one flock and one
shepherd.”[16] Thus, the object is unity regardless of what important Biblical
facts and teachings are denied.
A Plea for Discernment
This essay is meant not just to investigate an
interesting and knowledgeable writer and speaker, but it is meant to help
sharpen our powers of discernment. The Hebrew writer encourages his readers to
consume the “solid food” of the Word and be “mature” people, “who because of
practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil” (Hebrews 5:14).
Have you become a student of the Word of God?
Are you seeking to “accurately handle” the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15)? Are
you able to discern the “untaught and unstable” persons who “distort” the
Scriptures (2 Peter 3:16)? Are you able to keep from being “carried away by the
error of unprincipled men” (v. 17)? Are you able to see through the “smooth and
flattering speech” of false teachers who “deceive the hearts of the
unsuspecting” (Romans 16:18)?
We encourage you not only to see through the
false teachings and unbelief of William Barclay, but to have the knowledge and
wisdom to see through the false teachings and deceptive ways of teachers and
preachers on the radio, on the TV, or in magazines and books. False teachings
abound in our day and we must keep from succumbing to their deceptive
influence! Truth and truth alone will save and build us up in the faith.
—RH
-----------
Endnotes
[1] Harold Lindsell, The Bible in the Balance, pp. 45, 63.
[2] We take most of this from the book, Beware of False Teachers!
[3] Clive L. Rawlins, William Barclay, p. 547;
Lindsell, The Battle for the Bible,
pp. 154-155.
[4] William Barclay, A Spiritual Autobiography, pp. 58, 60, 61; Elmer G. Homrightausen, Barclay: Ecumenical Teacher of the Church,
in R. D. Kerhahan, William Barclay: The
Plain Uncommon Man, p. 137.
[5] A
Spiritual Autobiography, p. 38.
[6] Ibid. p. 47.
[7] Ibid., pp. 51-52.
[8] Quoted by Rawlins, pp. 377, 378, 387.
[9] A
Spiritual Autobiography, p. 30.
[10] Barclay, Matthew, Vol. 1, pp. 328-329; cf.
Mark, pp. 118-119.
[11] Matthew, Vol. 2, pp. 114-115.
[12] Kernahan, p. 42.
[13] Ibid., p. 11.
[14] Terry L. Miethe, The Compact Dictionary of Doctrinal Words, p. 127.
[15] Barclay, Seen in the Passing, p. 153.
[16] Ibid., pp. 153-155.
